A number of letters front all over Russia, Alexandrov’s news, a talk
with Tick and several other new arrivals—all this strengthens my
conviction that there is some internal defect in the work of the C.C., a defect
of organisation, in the way the work is arranged. The general opinion is that
there is no Central Committee, that it does not make itself felt, that no one
notices it. And the facts confirm this. There is no evidence of the C.C.’s
political guidance of the Party. Yet all the C.C. members are working themselves
to death? What’s the matter?

In my opinion, one of the principal causes of it is that there are no regular
C.C. leaflets. Leadership by means of talks and personal contacts at a time of
revolution is sheer utopianism. Leadership must be public. All
other forms of work must be wholly and unconditionally subordinate to this form. A responsible C.C. litterateur should concern himself first
of all with writing (or obtaining from contributors—though the editor
himself should always be prepared to write) a leaflet twice a week on Party and
political topics (the liberals, the Socialist-Revolutionaries, the Minority,
the split, the Zemstvo delegation, the trade unions, etc., etc.) and
republishing it in every way, immediately mimeographing in 50 copies (if there
is no printing press) and circulating it to the committees for
republication. Articles in Proletary could, perhaps, sometimes be used
for such leaflets—after a certain amount of revision. I can not understand
why this is not being done! Can Schmidt
and Werner have forgotten our talks on this? Surely it is possible to write and
circulate at least one leaflet a week? The Report on the Third
Congress [1]
has not been
reprinted[2] in full anywhere in Russia all this time. It is so
outrageous, such a fiasco for all the C.C. ’s famous “techniques”
that I simply cannot understand what Winter was thinking about, what Sommer and
the others are thinking about! After all, are there not committee
print-shops in
existence?

Apparently, the C.C. members completely fail to understand the tasks of
“keeping in the public eye”. Yet without that there is no centre,
there is no Party! They are working themselves to the bone, but they are working
like moles, at secret rendezvous, at meetings, with agents, etc., etc. It is a
sheer waste of strength! If you are short-handed, then put third-rate forces on
the job, even tenth-rate ones, but attend to the political leadership
yourselves, issue leaflets first and foremost. And then—personal
appearances and speeches at district meetings (in Polesye no one attend ed the
meeting. A scandal. They all but broke away!), at conferences, etc. Something
like a C.C. diary should be published, a C.C. bulletin, and every important
question should be dealt with in a leaflet issued twice a week. It is not
difficult to publish one: 50 copies can be run off on a hectograph and
circulated, one of the committees can print it and have copies sent to us. The
thing is to act, to act all the time openly, to stop being
dumb. Otherwise we here, too, are completely cut off.

Perhaps the C.C. should be enlarged? Half a dozen more agents taken on? People
could be found for this, I’m sure. In fact, I want to suggest a practical step
right now: in view of the almost total absence of correspondence between the
C.C. members (we have had only two letters from Werner and Winter, and front
Alexandrov only news from the road, “travel impressions, nothing
more), it is absolutely essential to carry out our joint decision of
May 10, 1905, concerning the holding of a meeting by September 1,
19O5.[3]
For heaven’s sake, don’t put this off, don’t be stingy about
spending 200-300 rubles. Without this, there is a great
danger that we shall not be able to set things going properly. At the moment
they are not moving at all. This is evident from all reports.

There are still six weeks to go to September 1. It is possible to wind up
affairs and make arrangements for a trip in good time, after corresponding among
others with Alexandrov as to who should go. I await a reply.

Notes

[2]The Report on the Third Congress and the major resolutions were
published in Proletary No. 1, for May 14 (27), 1905.

[3]Lenin is here referring to the decision of the plenary meeting of the
C.C. of the R.S.D.L.P. (the first plenum after the Third Congress), held on
April 27 (May 10), 1905, concerning the next plenary meeting to be held in
Geneva on September 1 (14). This decision was not carried out.